Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20200704122809.73794-1-konradybcio@gmail.com> <20200704130922.GB21333@willie-the-truck>
In-Reply-To: <20200704130922.GB21333@willie-the-truck>
From:   Konrad Dybcio <konradybcio@gmail.com>
Date:   Sat, 4 Jul 2020 15:20:04 +0200
Message-ID: <CAMS8qEU7owyk0ELmfE7f6Q_C0RT0cy3N=WtP0DzEUhV6KPnDhQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] iommu/arm-smmu: Implement qcom,skip-init
To:     Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>
Cc:     skrzynka@konradybcio.pl, Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@arm.com>,
        Joerg Roedel <joro@8bytes.org>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@kernel.org>,
        linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
        iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org,
        DTML <devicetree@vger.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@linaro.org>,
        jcrouse@codeaurora.org, john.stultz@linaro.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

> It would probably be better to know _which_ context banks we shouldn't
> touch, no? Otherwise what happens to the others?

> Do we not need to worry about the SMRs as well?

This was mimicked from CAF (think [1]) and the SMMUs don't make the
hypervisor angry anymore, so I wouldn't be too picky on that if it works..


[1] https://github.com/sonyxperiadev/kernel/blob/aosp/LA.UM.7.1.r1/drivers/iommu/arm-smmu.c#L4104-L4109

Regards
Konrad